Simplifying a fractional factorial with variables

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the simplification of a factorial expression involving variables, specifically the expression (n/2)!/[(n+2)/2]!. Participants explore different approaches to simplify this expression, including substitutions and factorial properties, while addressing potential issues with the validity of the terms involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose simplifying (n/2)!/[(n+2)/2]! by canceling terms, leading to 1/[(n+2)(n+1)], while others suggest it simplifies to 2/(n+2).
  • A suggestion is made to use the substitution k = (n/2)! to facilitate simplification, though some express confusion about its utility.
  • Participants discuss the relationship between (k+1)! and k!, with some emphasizing the importance of understanding this relationship for simplification.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of (n/2)! when n is an arbitrary integer, with some arguing that this invalid term does not affect the simplification process.
  • One participant asserts that the simplification process can lead to valid results despite starting with an invalid term, while another counters that this is not how mathematics should operate.
  • A later reply provides a detailed breakdown of the factorials involved, leading to a conclusion that supports the simplification to 2/(n+2).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the factorial terms involved and the correctness of the simplification process. There is no consensus on the final simplified form or the implications of using invalid terms in the calculations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of the factorial definition when n is not a natural number, and the discussion includes unresolved mathematical steps regarding the simplification process.

hnicholls
Messages
49
Reaction score
1
I am trying to work through a simplication of this factorial with variables:

(n/2)!/[(n+2)/2]!

I get,

2[n(n-1)]/2[(n+2)(n+1)n(n-1)]

cancelling the 2[n(n-1)]

leaves me with 1/[(n+2)(n+1)]

However, Wolfram Alpha tells me this can be simplified as 2/(n+2) and I don't see that.

Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
hnicholls said:
I am trying to work through a simplication of this factorial with variables:

(n/2)!/[(n+2)/2]!

I get,

2[n(n-1)]/2[(n+2)(n+1)n(n-1)]

cancelling the 2[n(n-1)]

leaves me with 1/[(n+2)(n+1)]

However, Wolfram Alpha tells me this can be simplified as 2/(n+2) and I don't see that.

Thanks

simplify by using k = (n/2)! and go from there. It falls out rather easily.
 
I'm not clear how a substitution of k = (n/2)! would help.
 
How much is (k+1)! ?
 
(k+1)k(k-1)(k-2) etc.
 
hnicholls said:
(k+1)k(k-1)(k-2) etc.
You are REALLY making all this a lot harder than it needs to be at every step of the way.
 
phinds said:
How much is (k+1)! ?
I guess what @phinds means is "How much is (k+1)! when k = n/2?"
 
phinds said:
simplify by using k = (n/2)! and go from there. It falls out rather easily.
hnicholls said:
I am trying to work through a simplication of this factorial with variables:

(n/2)!/[(n+2)/2]!
Write (n+2)/ 2 = n/2 +1. So you have ##\frac {(n/2)!}{(n/2+1)!}##
How are k! and (k+1)! related?
 
DrClaude said:
I guess what @phinds means is "How much is (k+1)! when k = n/2?"
No, what I meant was exactly the hint that ehild made more explicit. It's irrelevant for this step that you have set K = n/2, as that has no bearing on the simplification once you've replaced n/2 with K. Sure, once you've done the simplification, you have to put n/2 back in place of K but again, that's irrelevant to the simplification.

ehild has combined my two hints. I think at this point, there just isn't any way to GIVE any further hints without just spoon feeding the answer which is what we've all been trying to avoid.
 
  • #10
There is no such thing as ##(n/2)!## when ##n## is just an arbitrary integer. I don't care what wolfram says, the factorial is only defined for natural numbers.
 
  • #11
micromass said:
There is no such thing as ##(n/2)!## when ##n## is just an arbitrary integer. I don't care what wolfram says, the factorial is only defined for natural numbers.
Sure, but that has no bearing on this problem. Do the simplification that I suggested and you'll see that the factorial falls out completely so your point, while true, is irrelevant to this problem. That is, the original statement DOES in fact have an invalid term, as you point out, but so what if it falls out by simplification?
 
  • #12
phinds said:
Sure, but that has no bearing on this problem. Do the simplification that I suggested and you'll see that the factorial falls out completely so your point, while true, is irrelevant to this problem. That is, the original statement DOES in fact have an invalid term, as you point out, but so what if it falls out by simplification?

So you think it's a good thing that something invalid is equal to something valid? That's not how math works.
 
  • #13
micromass said:
So you think it's a good thing that something invalid is equal to something valid? That's not how math works.
No, I understand what you're saying but I think this is an exercise in simplification.
 
  • #14
(n/2)!/[(n+2)/2]!

(n/2)! = (n/2)(n/2 - 2/2) = (n/2)[(n-2)/2]

[(n+2)/2]! = [(n+2)/2][(n+2)/2 - 2/2][(n+2)/2 - 4/2] = [(n+2)/2][(n/2][(n- 2)/2]

cancel out the (n/2)[(n-2)/2] and you are left with 1/[(n+2)/2] or 2/(n+2)

Thanks DrClaude. The last point was a BIG help.

Henry
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K